| OCR Text |
Show 32 and even public participation (Clark, Stankey & Shannon, 1999; Depoe, 2004; Depoe & Delicath, 2004; Depoe, Delicath & Elsenbeer, 2004; Dietz & Stern, 2008; Kinsella, 2004). Perhaps beginning with Burke's (1969) work, we might say rhetoric has always been about framing, since it regularly focuses on discursive processes that negotiate productions of meaning, identities, and symbolic actions (see Kuypers, 2010). However, much of this research still assumes that corporations are masters of private deception that use their resources to eclipse the public sphere. This fundamentally misunderstands how corporations work because it reduces corporations to humanistic frameworks of rhetoric and subjectivity that assume subjectivity involves singular, reasonable subjects. Nonetheless, critics have marched onward in their moral charges against corporate manipulation. The global warming debate has been at the top of this list, as numerous academics have argued that corporations invested in in the carbon-based economy frame environmental realities in ways that privilege economic progress over environmental sustainability by using resources such as media access (Dyer-Witheford, 1999; Entman, 1993; Gitlin, 1981; McChesney, 2008; Mosco, 1996; Scheufele, 1999, 2004; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007) to their rhetorical advantage. Corporations have seemingly emerged as primary agents in this political controversy and other environmental issues. Toby Smith (2015), for instance, argues that epistemologies of science and technology have undergirded discourses of consumerism that have positioned consumers, not industries, as the primary agents of change. This is the "myth of green marketing" that "perpetuates the values of progress, evolution, rationality, autonomy, expansionism, and so forth, while at the same time containing and domesticating legitimate challenges from the dystopian side |
